• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Abstract
 Main
 Reference
 Back Cover














Title: How do rural women perceive development?
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00089944/00001
 Material Information
Title: How do rural women perceive development?
Physical Description: Book
Creator: Due, Jean M.
Donor: Marianne Schmink ( endowment )
Publisher: Michigan State University,
Publication Date: 1984
Copyright Date: 1984
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00089944
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: 11325090 - OCLC

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Abstract
        Abstract 1
        Abstract 2
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
    Reference
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Back Cover
        Page 21
Full Text








:~ .~I
..


tci
~.i~.






~ : ;


:
i~
:" I
.i;
1.
i
is i'i.i
P 6iF;;:- _3:i: 1.
:l.i

rr*
,., ,~
:7~ I-;.-i '"-'~
.i
-..!. 1
,~4:,l.ie;r-; : s.., EI
?: : -
r.:. :"":?I '; I: -
~r "': :: ; I`"' '"
;..Jc i:...
-: .rr;
.. i
t.
..~~
i-- ",
L~S~~T_ -i'-i -;`:.`T.tT;~"~;~~~;srT
I;_~i :~.-i~r,~l
...:.... .........


;I-;S.. I-.~ ~j F.
8 ,.. ~?i__il_;
2;:'-':i1; ;;~; ~.

I!::::; i;:--
-' ;r~ I: ~; I ..;-. .....i..`;~~?.~ .I,i .. ~
;.-,. ~ ;
~ir;gy~~ *..~:. i Li: I~


.,








~~~ ~ .; ,... .. ,.- : : .
,' .
., ..- ... .. .I .' ~. .! ;


MERGE

60


ny.
1W
7'. Z


4a:i4
.Ja.-f *'. ~ cA


-~ A"*-



















- iotlflf







*~~ ~ ~ ~ .t* ..- -A. '
-~~ .AA-t~r;A
*~* :. .< A A


ji.


i:'
''
L
r
:
~' "'
' -`'

i- :;:
:"


"..n''""'~!';;~,:~:: ;-:'bft: .9' r'
:I
ii~j-I I. ~ .i.
".
.i,~~ -~ c'I -' : L"
i ~Yi .I ly I
.;
;i:

-.....:. ..; ;..


~ : :al:



'-

~
~~W~!l. *"
`: ~~
~". r-
i*r
.- -i
I i.s-';... r

















HOW DO RURAL WOMEN PERCEIVE DEVELOPMENT?
A CASE STUDY IN ZAMBIA

by

Jean M. Due, University of Illinois
Timothy Mudenda, University of Zambia
Patricia Miller, University of Illinois

Working Paper #63
August 1984









Abstract: In this study 112 farm and 30 market women were interviewed
almost 20 years after Zambia gained independence to ascertain whether or not
these women perceived development occurring, whether they had influenced its
path, and what kinds of development would most assist them. Women also were
asked what amount of time they contributed to farming (or their market
activities) and to household tasks. Results showed that farm women
contributed 53% of the total agricultural labor on their farms and 82% of
the household labor.

Fifty-one percent of the farm women and 57% of the market women believed
that development had occurred in the areas where they lived and, of this
group, 88% believed they had benefited from this development. Only
one-third of the farm women and one-half the market women, however, believed
they had "influenced" the direction of development.

When asked what kinds of development would most assist them, the farm
women's responses were farm improvements, credit, clinics, wells, and
transport. Of the 53 responses describing farm improvements, 20 wanted
labor saving devices (oxen and ploughs, tractors for hire), 14 wanted higher
farm prices, 9 lower input prices, and 6 more cattle. The market women
wanted improved markets, cooperatives for women, and clinics.










About the Authors: Dr. Jean M. Due is professor of Agricultural Economics,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She has written widely on
agricultural development in Africa, availability of credit to smallholders,
farming systems, and women in African development.

Timothy Mudenda is a research associate, Rural Development Studies Bureau,
University of Zambia, Lusaka. He has written several of the Bureau's
publications on Zambian Agriculture and is currently a graduate student in
Agricultural Economics at Iowa State University.

Patricia Miller is a graduate student in Agricultural Economics at the
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. She worked as the research
assistant on the study reported in this paper. Her major interest is in
agricultural marketing and transportation.


Copyright 1984, MSU Board of Trustees








HOW DO RURAL WOMEN PERCEIVE DEVELOPMENT? A CASE STUDY IN ZAMBIA1


When *Zambia became independent in 1964, foreign exchange and revenue
generated by the copper industry provided the government with significant
funds to undertake economic development. But the oil crisis and sharp
declines in copper prices in the mid 1970s slowed the pace of development,
forcing the government to adopt new strategies. The focus shifted from an
export-oriented strategy based on copper to an emphasis on agriculture
needed for greater food self-sufficiency, and import substitution.
Government revenues had been used at the national level to develop
transport, power, education, and agriculture, the latter through guaranteed
prices, input and credit supply for farmers and subsidies for consumers.
This study questions whether "trickle-down" effects were apparent to rural
women at the local level.

During the 20 years since independence, Zambia's per capital Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) .has increased dramatically from $184 in 1964 to $600
in 1981 (World Bank 1983), but in real terms the gain is much less.2
Women's share in these gains is varied. Schuster (1983) argues that Zambian
government policy was a "successful" development strategy for some female
white-collar workers, but, as Jules-Rosette (1982) points out, this includes
only a small percentage of Zambian women. Jules-Rosette also argues that
the strategy has contributed to greater marginalization of women as they are
"pulled" through migration into the urban areas but find employment only in
the informal sector. The question remains as to how these policies have
affected women who continue to live in the rural areas. This study asks
whether Zambian rural women see development occurring in their. areas and
what types of development they think would most help them. Their
perceptions are important for the formulation of policy at all levels.

Background

The research on which the paper is based was prompted in part by Liz
Wily's (1981) excellent study undertaken in ten villages and the Arusha
region of Tanzania. Tanzanian government personnel moved people from
scattered farm households into ujamaa3 villages in the mid 1970s so that
formal and political education, health, and water could be provided more
inexpensively. Government operations were decentralized to provide more
rapid and responsible development, and lip service was given to "development
from below." The government's policy is that women should not be singled
out for special projects. Yet the women's political organization (UWT) and
the ujamaa programs are oriented toward women as homemakers--a much too
narrow focus in Wily's view since rural women are actively involved in the
farming enterprise as well as in other income-generating activities. Wily
concludes:

In neither of the critical productive areas, agriculture and
livestock, are programs designed to reach women farmers. Small
Industries Development tends to bypass women as poor managers and








-2-


disinterested parties, despite their widespread involvement in
small-scale production of handicrafts and utility items. More
broadly, the sum effect is that the needs of rural women are still
by and large falling beyond the bounds of regional development
(1981:15).

Wily found that "few women were able to identify developments or changes
since independence which had an impact, negative or positive, upon their
lives" (1981:21). Of the few women who did respond to the question, "The
answer was uniform: the provision of either water or a clinic service
represented the development which had the most significant impact upon their
lives" (ibid.). Wily then continues:

A growing body of opinion exists which asserts that improved
agricultural practices have usually had an adverse impact upon
women farmers, in the sense that they create more work for
women.... Only the introduction of ox-ploughs and tractors have
reduced their burden....

As long as women do not own the returns of their labor (the
income) the benefits of improved production might well seem
inadequate to them....

The women were emphatic that agricultural extension programmes had
had precisely no impact upon their lives....

Women interviewed were more positive of those developments which
involved only women than more general village development projects
(1981:26-29).

Wily is not the only author who found that development is not having the
intended positive impact on women. Susan Geiger (1982), also writing of
Tanzania women, argues that there has been an unwillingness on the part of
the government and the UWT to:

confront the issue of women's subordination and lack of control
over their own labor power in the rural family or household. To.
exhort impoverished rural women to work harder under prevailing
circumstances seems cruelly inappropriate...

Claire Robertson, after reviewing the literature written since 1976 on women
in African agriculture, concludes:

The substantive findings indicate that although African women
S generally do upwards of 60% of the agricultural labor,...women do
not reap proportionate profits. Instead they are -losing direct
access to land, and do not generally receive the benefits of
extension service, vocational education, or capital inputs (1983).










Is the same view held by Zambian rural women? To ascertain whether
Zambian women believe development has affected the areas in which they live
and if so, how, 112 farm women and 30 market women were interviewed. These
women represented three rural areas of Zambia that are at different levels
of agricultural development. The most traditional area is at Mpika in
Northern Province; the most modern, using oxen and hired mechanical
equipment, is Mazubuka in Southern Province; the other area, Mwumba in
Central Province, is intermediate. These areas were recommended by
government and university personnel and used for a 1976 study of rural
credit problems (Due 1978).

Sample Selection

Government personnel estimated that less than 5 percent of the male
farmers in the areas of interest had multiple wives. The women in these
households were eliminated from the sample since the initial objective of
the research was to document female contributions to the household income
and to labor, and the estimation of the household income would be much more
complicated in polygamous families. The wife was interviewed although the
husband was often present at the interview. Both married and single female
co-heads or heads of farm households were interviewed; fourteen percent of
the farm sample consisted of households headed by women.

In Zambia each province is divided into districts; each district is
subdivided into wards (party units); and the wards are divided into
agricultural camps (extension units) each having a specified area, a number
of agricultural assistants (AAs), and a number of farm families under its
jurisdiction. We decided to select farms of between 1 and 10 hectares in
size (2.5 to 25 acres) producing primarily domestic rather than export
crops. Farm families in settlement schemes were excluded because of the
special services provided to them. Districts with concentrations of small
farms were chosen to reduce transport costs. Wards were chosen at random
Within the districts as were the farm families. AAs normally have lists of
all families in their wards, and some AAs also have data on farm size and
yields.4 This study used the same districts and wards in each province as
the 1976 study with a sample target of 40 farm households in each
province.5 In each area 10 market women were selected from the closest
market town to include representative market activities then being
undertaken by women.

The study was conducted jointly with personnel from the Rural
Development Studies Bureau (RDSB), University of Zambia. The questionnaire
was designed by Due and Mudenda and pretested in the Mwumba area. Due and
two staff members of the RDSB participated in data collection and hired the
two University of Zambia students who participated. Despite an effort to
recruit female students for this research, none agreed to serve because of
the short-term nature of the employment and the poor housing conditions in
the field.6 We were concerned that married farm women would not be
"allowed" to be interviewed by males without their husbands' consent, but
there were no problems after the AAs informed families of the nature of the











study. At first the AAs brought the* husbands to their offices for
interviews in spite of instructions that it was the wives who would be
interviewed! But that oversight was soon corrected and women were
interviewed at their homes or at AA offices, whichever was more convenient.

Socio-economic characteristics of the families

The average farm woman in the sample was in her early 40's and had less
than three years of formal education (Table 1); husbands had an average of
three years of .formal education. The average household size was 6.9
persons. The families were farming an average of 4 acres in Northern
Province, 9 acres in Central Province, and 16 acres in Southern Province.
The female respondents spent an average of 6.6 hours per day in agriculture
during the farming season compared with 5.7 hours per day for their
spouses. The children spent an average of 5.3 hours per day farming, and
others in the household an average of 1.6 hours per day. In addition, the
women devoted 4.1 hours per day to household activities (food preparation,
child care, household maintenance, etc.) while the spouses contributed 0.4
hours, the children 2.3 hours, and others 0.5 hours per day.

In Table 2, the children's hours are converted to adult hours on the
basis of children aged 8 to 11 equivalent to 0.3 and those aged 12 to 17
equivalent to 0.5 of an adult hour. On this basis, males averaged 7.4 hours
each day and females 8.5 a day in each family on agricultural activities and
1.1 and 5.0 hours per day, respectively, on household tasks. .Thus total
male hours were 8.5 a day and female 13.5 a day. Both males and females
allocated more total hours to work in Southern Province than in the others.
The total hours were fewest in Northern Province, where crop acreage also
was lowest: Thus, on an average, females contributed 53% of the total hours
for agricultural activities while males contributed 47%; in household tasks
females contributed 82% compared with 18% for males. Males assisted more
with household tasks in Southern Province where commercialization of
agriculture was greatest. These data are shown in Table 2.

Has any economic development occurred?

To ascertain whether or not these rural women believed they had
benefited from economic development in their areas, we asked first, "Has any
economic development occurred in your area in the last 10 years?"
Development was interpreted broadly by the interviewers as improvements in
family levels of well-being.7 The responses of the women are shown in
Table 3. Fifty-one percent of the farm women and 57% of the market women
believed that some development had occurred. Women in different areas had
contrasting reactions. In Northern Province (the least developed), 77% of
the farm women believed improvements had occurred. In Southern Province
(the most developed), only 40% saw positive changes. The women were asked
the kinds of improvements they noted. In response they mentioned most
frequently improvements in farming, the availability of educational
opportunities, clinics and wells, village cooperation, and roads and
transport. The market women mentioned most frequently improvements in
markets, in education, and in farming.








-5-


When they referred to improvements in farming, the women talked about
improved seeds, fertilizer and tools available, oxen and ploughs, tractors
and ploughs for hire, better farm prices, maize depots, and dipping tanks.
Farm credit was listed separately. Other items mentioned were roofing
sheets and improved incomes. Market women observed that better farming
conditions benefited them as improved incomes increased their sales.

Have you gained from this development?

We asked the farm women who thought some development had occurred,
whether they believed they had gained from this development. Eighty-eight
percent, or 45% of the total sample, believed that they had benefited.
These farm women saw benefits from improved educational opportunities for
their children, improved farming (including maize depots, dip tanks, and the
availability of seed and fertilizer), clinics and wells, and the
availability of credit. A higher percentage of the farm women in Southern
Province than in other areas sampled believed they had benefited.

Ninety-four percent of the market women who said development had
occurred believed they had benefited in terms of improved educational
opportunities, improved farming conditions, and improved markets (Table 4).

Did you have any influence on this development?

Sixty-five percent of the farm women who believed that development was
occurring believed they had influenced the path of development by working on
projects (making brick for schools and other self-help projects),
participating in meetings, working hard and setting an example in good
farming, and donating money. Seventy-six percent of the market women
believed they influenced the pattern of development by donating money,
working hard and setting an example in good marketing. The responses of
both groups are shown in Table 5. These women see development as a two-way
process; one has to take advantage of the opportunities offered when one has
access to those opportunities.

To summarize, only one-third of the total sample of farm women and less
than one-half of the market women believed they had influenced the
development taking place in their areas. The rural women in Northern and
Southern Provinces believed they had greater influence than did the women in
Central Province.

Of course, many women felt they had no influence. One woman responded,
"There is a need for development but as a woman I have no say in such
matters." Another said, "I am poor and discriminated against because I am
not married." Others felt they were excluded because of the neglect of the
AAs or the government, because they were unable to obtain loans,8 because
they were never consulted or because people would not come together to
plan. Another woman said, "The men take all the money put for projects
meant for women."










What kinds of development would most assist you?


When we asked the farm women what kinds of development would most help
them, the overwhelming responses were farming improvements (53), followed by
credit (25), clinics (19), wells (18), improved transport and roads (9), and
improved extension and farmer training centers (8) (Table 6). In all three
areas, farming improvements were the most important items these farm women
needed; credit was second in all areas except in Northern Province where
wells were more important. Of the 53 who desired farming improvements, 11
wanted oxen and ploughs, 14 higher prices and a surplus to sell, 9 tractors
for hire, 9 lower input prices, 6 loans to purchase more cattle, and others
maize grinding mills and assistance in drainage. Hence, labor-saving
devices (oxen and ploughs and mechanical assistance in ploughing) covered 20
responses. Farm credit needs added another 25 to the 53 responses for
farming improvements. Women cannot borrow in their own names from the
government credit agency unless they are divorced or widowed.

We found no major differences in responses between farm women who
believed development had occurred in their areas and those who did not in
terms of the kinds of development they believed would most assist them.
These responses appear in Tables 7 and 8.

For the market women, improved marketing facilities were most important
(10 responses) followed by loans (6), women's cooperatives (5), farming
improvements (2), education (2) and clinics (2).

It is not surprising that these rural Zambian women, who provide more
than one-half of the labor in agriculture, want labor-saving devices and
improved farm technologies (seeds, fertilizer, tools, oxen, ploughs and
tractors for hire) and credit to assist in improving their livelihoods.

Visits by extension agents

We asked the respondents if the AAs visited them during the year and if
they had attended farmer training or home economics courses. Staudt
(1975/76), Moock (1976), Wily (1981), and Robertson (1983) all found that
extension agents visit women farmers much less often than men. AAs had
visited 61 (54%) of the farm women in our sample during 1982: 60% of the
Northern women, 55% of the Southern, and 50% of the Central women farmers
reported visits from AAs. The frequency of visits was one to four times per
year. These figures should be regarded with caution, however, as we do not
know whether the AA's primary purpose was to visit the males or the females
of the household.

Although over half the farm women reported visits from an AA in 1982,
only 6 (5%) had attended farmer training courses and only 16 (14%), home
economics courses. In Northern Province, no women had attended farmer
training courses while in Central and Southern Provinces only 2 and 4
attended. The number attending home economics courses was also highest in
Southern Province. It should be noted that this is also the most developed










province. It could be that women are more likely to be included in programs
in more developed areas.

Twenty-three percent of the market women had been visited by AAs, one
had attended a farmer training course, and 30% had attended home economics
courses.

Some of the farm women commented on the lack of AA visits; 6 believed
they were not visited because their farms were too small; 5 said they met
AAs only in the beer halls; 3 thought AAs did not visit them because loans
were not available to women, and 2 thought it was because AAs had no
information on drainage problems.

Women's clubs

Are women's clubs available in these areas? In general, the answer is
"No." There were 3 women in gardening clubs, 3 in sewing clubs, 4 in
knitting clubs, and 5 in handicraft (pottery making). There were no women's
cooperatives for obtaining materials or marketing products.

General comments

Respondents were invited to make general comments at the end of the
interview. Most of these related to farming, credit, clinics, and wells.
Respondents complained that payment by government cooperatives and marketing
boards for the products received was often delayed; thus, farmers could not
repay credit extended through them and no new credit was available for the
next planting season. Many women also *wanted assistance with draining
problems, women's clubs, better farm prices, lower input prices and timely
availability of inputs, and mechanical ploughing for hire.

Further analysis

The authors have conducted research on women's contributions to the
farming system and to household income. A forthcoming article will document
this work in detail. Briefly, these data allow us to test the hypothesis
that women's perceptions as to whether development has occurred are related
to: 1) their levels of total production; 2) their freedom to make decisions
on the spending of their own or their husbands' incomes; 3) their freedom to
decide how much of the crop to sell; and 4) the value of their total cash
income. Pearson correlations were used to test these hypotheses. Among the
farm families there was a significant but negative correlation between the
respondent's perception that development had occurred and the value of both
total production and total cash income. There was a significant and
positive correlation between women's perception of development occurring and
their freedom to spend their own income. A significant but negative
correlation between perception of development occurring was associated with
women's freedom to spend their husbands' incomes, and a positive but











insignificant correlation between perceptions of development and their
freedom to make decisions as to the amount of the crop sold.

For the market women, there was also a significant but negative
correlation between perceptions of development occurring and a total income,
a significant but negative correlation between development and the freedom
of the respondent to spend her own income, and a positive but not
significant correlation between development and freedom to spend their
husbands' incomes.

Summary and conclusions

This study of 112 farm and 30 market women in three areas of Zambia at
different levels of development is unusual in that women were asked whether
they perceived development occurring, whether they had influenced its path,
and what kinds of development would most assist them. Data on labor
distribution show that farm women contribute 53% of the total agricultural
labor on their farms and 82% of the labor spent on household tasks.

Fifty-one percent of the farm women and 57% of the market women believed
that development had occurred in the areas where they lived and, of this
.group, 88% believed they had benefited from this development. But only
one-thi-rd of the total farm women and one-half of the market women believed
they had influenced the development.

When asked the kinds of development that would most assist them, the
farm women overwhelmingly answered that it was farm improvements, credit,
clinics, wells, and transport. Of the 53 respondents who wanted farm
improvements, 20 wanted labor-saving devices (oxen and ploughs, tractors for
hire), 14 wanted higher farm prices, 9 lower input prices and 6 more
cattle. The market women spoke about improved markets, cooperatives for
women, and clinics.

The perception that development had occurred was not positively
correlated with income but was positively correlated with a woman's freedom
to spend her own income.

The authors agree with Wily (1981) that development that focuses on
women as homemakers is a much too narrow focus, but our sample disagreed
with Wily and with Robertson (1983) in several respects. Zambian women,
unlike Tanzanian women, believed they would benefit most from improvements
in farming and credit, though, like the Tanzanian women, they desired
clinics and wells. In contrast to the Wily study in Tanzania, at least half
the women in our study believed that some development had occurred in their
areas and that there had been a "trickle-down" effect. Furthermore,
additional research by the present authors shows, in -contrast to Geiger,
that married women had some control over decisions as to how their income
should be spent, and they joined with their husbands in 50% of the cases in
decision as to how his and their total income was spent and the amount of
crop production sold. The higher the level of development, the more the
wives participated in these decisions.








-9-

A higher percentage of market than farm women experienced the
"trickle-down effects" of development, believed they had influenced the path
of development, and had attended home economics courses.

Two important conclusions need further emphasis. Extension and credit
delivery must change so that women are not excluded from information about
new technologies nor from the ability to purchase them. Development
planners and donor agencies must obtain more information from both women and
men in the rural areas before making judgments as to what kinds of
development will most benefit the rural sector. This research has shown
that rural Zambian women want improvements that assist their farming and
market roles rather than development that focuses on their homemaking roles.








-10-


NOTES

1. Funds for this research were contributed by the Research Board, Center
for International Comparative Studies, and African Studies Program,
University of Illinois, and the Rural Development Studies Bureau,
University of Zambia. The authors wish to thank government officials
and families without whose cooperation this research would not have been
possible.

2. These figures do not adequately reflect changes in inflation or exchange
rates.

3. Collective villages.

4. Dr. Alistair Sutherland, the ARPT rural sociologist in Zambia, reminds
the senior author that we may have "an extension worker bias" because
"often AA registers contain unrepresentative and partial lists of farm
families, often missing female-headed households." We tried to avoid
this bias by informing Ministry officials and AAs of the study; we
explained to the AAs the methodology of sample selection: farm families
with acreages between 2.5 and 25 acres and a sample selected at random.
AAs very much wanted to select the sample for us. Again it was
explained that it had to.be a random sample. They participated in the
selection. They had to close their eyes and pick the first family on a
list. Then we selected every 10th family from districts chosen.
Families who farmed acreages outside the 2.5 to 25 acre limits we
eliminated. Once we picked at random one family in an area, we selected
other families within a two-mile radius to reduce transport costs. Thus
we were not confined to AAs' lists. In some areas AAs had lists,'
acreage, yields, and other data. In other areas, these data, though
required, had never been gathered.

5. The usable sample in Northern Province was 30 farm families because of
distances and budget constraints.

6. To reduce costs, RDSB personnel and the students slept in sleeping bags
in AA offices or unused houses and cooked their own meals while in the
field.

7. The senior author defines economic development as the process by which a
population improves its per capital level of well-being and equity in its
distribution. For this research the equity consideration was not
included.

8. Women cannot borrow from the government Agricultural Finance Company in
their own names unless they are divorced or widowed.








-11-


Table 1. Socio-Economic Data of
1982.


Sampled Zambian Farm Families, by Province,


Central Northern


Sample Size


Average:
Age of wives
Age of husbands

Years of education:
Wife
Husband


Average number in household
Male person equivalents1
Female person equivalents1

Total adults farming

Average size of farm (acres)

Average hours worked in farming
each day:
Wife
Husband
Children 8-11 (total)
12-17 (total)
Others

Total hours farming per household


43.7
45.4


3.0
4.0

7.7
2.3
2.1

4.4

16.4



6.8
6.4
2.1
3.4
2.5

21.2


42


41.3
42.9


4.2
3.0

7.1
1.8
2.0

3.8

9.2



7.0
5.6
2.3
3.6
1.5

20.0


30 112


41.7
42.7


1.5
2.0

5.8
1.7
1.9

3.6

4.4



6.0
4.9
1.7
2.2
0.6

15.4


42.2
43.7


2.9
3.0

6.9
1.9
1.9

3.9

10.4



6.6
5.7
2.1
3.2
1.6

19.2


Average hours worked in
each day:
Wife
Husband
Children 8-11 (total)
12-17 (total)
Others


domestic tasks

3.7
0.6
0.6
1.7
0.6


Total hours domestic tasks
per household


iChildren aged 8-11 are equivalent to 0.3 adult
to 0.5.


labor units and aged 12-17


Southern


Total


4.2
0.4
1.0
2.2
0.6


4.6
0.1
0.2
1.1
0.3


4.1
0.4
0.6
1.7
0.5


7.3


6.2








-12-


Table 2. Allocation of Hours Per Day to Farming and to Domestic Tasks per
Family by Sex, Sampled Farm Families, Zambia, 1982.


Southern Central Northern Total

n = 40 n = 42 n = 30 n = 112

Hours per day worked in farming:
Respondent 6.8 7.0 6.0 6.6
Spouse 6.4 5.6 4.9 5.7
Children 8-111 Males .2 .2 .2 .3
Females .3 .5 .2 .3
Children 12-171 Males .7 .8 .7 .7
Females 1.0 1.0 .4 .8
Others Males 1.5 .3 .4 .7
Females 1.0 1.2 .2 .8

Total hours per day farming
Males 8.9 6.9 6.2 7.4
Females 9.1 9.7 6.8 8.5

Hours per day worked on
domestic tasks:
Respondent 3.7 4.2 4.6 4.1
Spouse 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.4
Children 8-111 Males 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1
Females 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1
Children 12-171 Males 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4
Females 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.5
Others Males 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2
Females 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.3

Total hours per day in
domestic tasks
Males 1.4 1.0 0.5 1.1
Females 4.6 5.6 5.1 5.0

Total hours per day
Males 10.3 7.9 6.7 8.5
Females 13.7 15.3 11.9 13.5


1For adult equivalencies, see note, Table 1.








-13-


Table 3. Has any Economic Development Occurred in Your Area in the Last 10
Years?


Province

Southern




Central




Northern


Sample
Size


(a) Farm Women

Yes Percent Kinds (Improvement in) *


40 16 40 Education 5, clinic 4, road & transport
improvement 4, farming 3, wells 3,
improved housing 2, maize depots 2,
village cooperation 2, credit 1

42 18 43 Farming 9, education 7, clinic 2,
improved housing 2, credit 2, village
cooperation 2, road & transport
improvement 1

30 23 77 Farming 8, education 7, women's clubs 5,
village cooperation 2, wells 1, training
1, improved housing 1


(b) Total
Farm women 112 57 51 Farming 20, education 19, clinic & wells
10, village cooperation 6, housing 5,
road & transport 5, women's club 5,
credit 3, maize depots 2, training 1
Market
women 30 17 57 Markets 6, education 5, farming 4


*These were multiple answers about the types of development perceived.








-14-


Table 4. Do You Feel You Have Gained From This Development?
of Those Who Believed Development Had Occurred)


(Asked Only


Number who be-
lieved development
had occurred


(a) Farm Women


Yes Percent


How (Improved)*


15 94 Education
clinic
transport
credit 1


3, wells
3, farming
2, housing


15 83 Education 7, farming 5,
increased income 3, credit
2, improved roads &
transport 2, improved
housing 1

20 87 Education 5, farming 5,
access to training 3,
village organizations -3,
housing 1


(b) Total

Farm Women 57 50 88 Education 15, farming 12,
clinic & wells 6, credit
4, transport & roads 4,
training 3, village
organization 3

Market Women 17 16 94 Education 3, farming 3,
markets 2


*These were multiple answers.


Province

Southern




Central





Northern








-15-


Table 5. Did You Have Any Influence on This Development?
Those who Believed Development had Occurred)


(Asked Only of


Number who be-
lieved development
had occurred


(a) Farm Women


Yes Percent


How (Improved)*


11 69 Meetings 7, worked on
projects 4, hard work 1

10 56 Meetings 5, donated money
2, by example of farming
2, hard work 1


16 70 Worked on
hard work
farming 5,


projects
& example
meetings 3


(b) Total

Farm Women 57 37 65 Worked on projects 15,
meetings 15, hard work and
example in farming 9,
donated money 2

Market Women 17 13 76 Donated money 4, hard work
3, by example 2.


*These were multiple answers.


Province

Southern


Central


Northern








-16-


Table 6. What Kinds of Development Would Most Assist You?


Sample
Size


Province

Southern


Central


Northern


Farm Women




Market Women


(a) Farm Women

Kinds

Farming improvements 22, credit 11, wells
5, clinics 5, road & transport improvement
4, lower input prices 2, markets 1

Farming improvements 18, credit 12,
clinics 10, surplus for sale 10, transport
5, wells 5, more cattle 5, extension 2

Farming improvements 13, wells 3, farm
training center 4, clinics 4, credit 2,
extension 2, housing 2, lower input prices
2, co-op for women 1


(b) Total


Farming improvements 53, credit 25, clinic
19, wells 18, improved road & transport 9,
extension and training center 8, cattle 5,
lower input prices 4

Improve market 10, loans 6, co-op for
women 5, farm improvement 2, schools 2,
clinic 2


*These were multiple answers.








-17-


Table 7. Kinds of Development Which Would Most Assist Zambian Women Who
Believed Development Had Occurred


Province

Southern


Number who be-
lieved development
had occurred


Central


Northern


Farm Women




Market Women


(a) Farm Women


Kinds*

Farming improvements 7, credit 4, clinic
4, improved roads & transport 2, wells 1,
markets 1

Clinic 6, farming improvements 5, credit
4, improved roads & transport 4, wells 2,
extension 2, co-op for women 1, housing 1

Farming improvements 12, wells 6, clinic
3, credit 1, extension 1, co-op for women
1, housing 1, input prices lower


(b) Total


Farming improvements 24, clinic 13,
credit 9, wells 9, improved roads &
transport 6, extension 2, housing 2,
co-op for women 2

Co-op for women 5, credit 5, improved
markets 4, schools 2, farming
improvements 1, clinic 1


*These were multiple answers.








-18-


Table 8. Kinds of Development Which Would Most Assist Zambian Women who Did
Not Observe Development Occurring


(a) Farm Women


Number who saw
no development


Province

Southern


Central


Northern


Farm Women





Market Women


Kinds*

Farming improvements 15, credit 6,
wells 4, improved road & transport 2,
lower input prices 2, clinic 1, co-op
for women 1

Farming improvements 13, credit 8,
clinic 4, wells 3, extension 1,
improved road & transport 1, co-op for
women 1, grain mill 1

Wells 2, credit 1, farming improvements
1, extension 1, clinic 1, schools 1,
housing 1


(b) Total


Farm improvements 29, credit 15, clinic
11, wells 9, improve roads & transport
3, extension 2, co-op for women 2,
lower input prices 2, housing 1, grain
mill 1, school 1

Improve markets 6, credit 1, farm
improvement 1, clinic 1


*These were multiple answers.







-19-


REFERENCES


Due, Jean M.
1978


Agricultural Credit in Zambia by Level of Development. Rural
Development Studies Bureau, University of Zambia. Occasional
Paper. Lusaka, Zambia.


Due, Jean M., Timothy Mudenda, Patricia Miller, and Marcia White
1983 Women's Contribution to Farming Systems and Household Income in
Zambia. Paper presented at African Studies Association Annual
Meeting, Boston, MA.

Geiger, Susan
1982 Umoja Wa Wanawake Wa Tanzania and the Needs of the Rural Poor.
African Studies Review, Vol. XXV (2/3):45-65.

Jules-Rosette, Bennetta
1982 Women's Work in the Informal Sector: A Zambia Case Study.
Working Papers on Women in International Development Number 3.
Office of Women in International Development, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, MI

Moock, Peter R.
1976 The efficiency of women as farm managers: Kenya. American
Journal of Agricultural Economics 58(5): 833-835.

Robertson, Claire
1983 An Overview of Literature on African Women's Agriculture, 1976
to the Present. Paper presented at African Studies Association
Annual Meeting. Boston, MA.

Schuster, Ilsa
1983 Female White Collar Workers: A Case Study of Successful
Development in Lusaka, Zambia. Working Papers on Women in
International Development Number 29. Office of Women in
International Development, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI.

Staudt, Kathleen
1975/76 Women farmers and inequities in agricultural services. Rural
Africana 29 (Winter): 81-94.


Wily, Liz
1981




World Bank
1983


Women and Development: A Case Study of Ten Tanzanian
Villages. Report prepared for Arusha Planning and Village
Development Project, Arusha, Tanzania. Regional Commissioner's
Office, Arusha, Tanzania.


World Development Report 1983. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.








MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY


WORKING PAPERS ON WOMEN IN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT


Published by the Office of Women in International Development
at Michigan State University and partially funded by a Title
XII Strengthening Grant

EDITOR: Rita S. Gallin, Women in International Development and
College of Nursing

MANAGING EDITOR: Margaret Graham, Women in International Development

EDITORIAL ASSOC.: Patricia Whittier, Women in International Development


EDITORIAL BOARD:


Marilyn Aronoff, Department of Sociology
Ada Finifter, Political Science
Peter Gladhart, Departments of Family and Child
Ecology and Resource Development
John Hinnant, Department of Anthropology
Susan Irwin, Department of Anthropology
Akbar Mahdi, Department of Sociology
Nalini Malhotra, Department of Sociology
Anne Meyering, Department of History
Ann Millard, Department of Anthropology
Barbara Rylko-Bauer, Department of Anthropology
Judith Stallmann, Department of Agricultural Economics
Paul Strassmann, Department of Economics
Diane Turner, Department of Anthropology
Anne Ferguson, Department of Anthropology


EDITORIAL POLICY: The series of Working Papers on Women in International
Development publishes reports of empirical studies, theoretical analyses, and
projects that are concerned with development issues affecting women in
relation to social, political, and economic change. Its scope includes
studies of women's historical and changing participation in political,
economic, and religious spheres, intra- and inter-family role relations,
gender identity, women's health and health care, and the sexual division of
labor.

MANUSCRIPTS should be submitted in duplicate to the editor, Rita S. Gallin,
WID Publication Series, Office of WID, 202 International Center, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1035. They should be
double-spaced and include the following: (1) title page bearing the name,
address, and institutional affiliation of the authorss; (2) one-paragraph
abstract; (3) text; (4) notes; (5) references cited; and (6) tables and
figures. To further the rapid dissemination of information, a timely schedule
of manuscript review and publication is followed.

TO ORDER PUBLICATIONS OR RECEIVE A LISTING OF WORKING PAPERS, write to the
Office of WID, 202 International Center, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI 48824-1035.


MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs